Previous post
The prosecutor in New Mexico messed up royally. Which led to the shocking events yesterday afternoon. Judge Sommer abruptly dismissed the Alec Baldwin case WITH PREJUDICE.
Alec Baldwin’s involuntary manslaughter case was abruptly thrown out in a stunning development Friday — as a New Mexico judge slammed prosecutors for withholding critical evidence from the defense.
Baldwin, 66, sobbed in Santa Fe court as the charges — stemming from the fatal shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on the set of “Rust” — were suddenly tossed.
The dad of eight hugged his wife Hilaria Baldwin, who was also crying, before climbing into an SUV without speaking to the media.
The entire debacle surrounding the RUST movie and the tragedy of the shooting has been one that speaks to the utter carelessness of every single person involved. And yes, that includes Alec Baldwin.
However, to find out that the prosecution was likely playing games and withholding evidence from the defense? You … DON’T DO THAT.
Baldwin’s attorneys earlier on Friday filed a surprise motion to have the case thrown out because the state failed to turn over a box of ammunition to the defense that they argued could have been linked to the killing of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.
~Snip
A prevailing mystery in the case was how live rounds got mixed up with blanks on the movie set.
Former police officer Troy Teske turned in the batch of rounds the defense accused prosecutors of hiding to the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office in March.
Teske claimed the rounds came from movie prop supplier Seth Kenney, owner of PDQ Props, and that they could match the bullet that killed Hutchins.
And now, because the case has been dismissed with prejudice, we will likely never know the full story that led up to that tragic shooting.
Do I like Alec Baldwin as a person? No. Have I liked him in certain roles as an actor? Definitely. That said, this case has evidently had a metric ton of problems from the very start, and it sure looks like chain-of-evidence and prosecutorial misconduct were a key issue. From what it looks like, this was a Brady violation.
The landmark decision Brady v. Maryland was handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1963. The decision held that, under the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments, a prosecutor has a duty to disclose favorable evidence to defendants upon request, if the evidence is “material” to either guilt or punishment. Failure to comply with this duty has become commonly known as a “Brady violation.”
And it seems the judge was very clear on all that issue. She was very blunt in stating that it was the STATE, thus the sheriff and prosecutors who withheld evidence.
There will be spin. There will be conspiracy theories. And they are already running rampant. That said, I think it’s worth considering the following points. Attorney Kurt Schlichter:
Unpopular Opinion: If the prosecution did not disclose key evidence until the middle of trial (I do not know if that happened, but the court thought so), the case must be dismissed. Double jeopardy attaches – he cannot be retried.
The govt has an absolute duty to obey the rules and not hide evidence. Assuming the court is correct that the prosecution did so, there is no other option. The case MUST be dismissed.
This is essential to protect all of us – especially after we have seen malicious prosecution against conservatives. I expect Donald Trump to have the bogus cases against him dismissed if and when his defense demonstrates that Jack Smith or Fani Willis or Alvin Bragg hid evidence.
Exactly. Prosecutorial misconduct and withholding of evidence is bad all the way around.
Whether "right" or "wrong" result, the Govt has got to play by the rules and pay the price when it does not.
— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) July 12, 2024
The Govt has pretty much every advantage in a criminal case. All the Def. really has is the ability to force the Govt to comply with the rules and its ethical… https://t.co/L6ZFfFmEnc
Do I think Alec Baldwin is guilty? Well, he’s an asshole so… Do I think he’s guilty of carelessness? Yes. Were others careless on the set? It sure looks like it.
That said, if the prosecutors had done their job and built the case adhering to all the rules; today’s outcome would’ve been very different.
The road to the trial was paved with twists and turns — including on Friday when fellow co-special prosecutor Erlinda Ocampo Johnson resigned.
Special Prosecutor Erlinda Ocampo Johnson who resigned after discovering that evidence was withheld in Alec Baldwin’s case which has now been dismissed with prejudice joins me for an exclusive interview to set the record straight pic.twitter.com/Hc4IA4ItZm
— Christopher C. Cuomo (@ChrisCuomo) July 13, 2024
Thus, the case against Alec Baldwin was dismissed with prejudice due to a very serious Brady violation. Which leaves only civil suits going forward.
Halyna Hutchens is dead and her family is devastated. Yet with the outcome of this case, it is looking highly likely that we will never truly know what exactly happened that day with the interaction between her and Alec Baldwin.
Feature Photo Credit: Alec Baldwin by Gage Skidmore via Flickr, cropped and modified
Brady violation it is. Unfortunately, it lets this borderline (if not over it) sociopath back out into society.
I fully expect that this is not the last we’ll hear of him being “justice system involved.” Assault and battery, DUI, something. (Although a DUI he may only manage to kill himself, instead of innocents. One can hope.)
Edward Lunny says: The gross incompetence, or worse, the deliberate effort to hide potentially exculpatory evidence raises many, many questions about the quality of the prosecution team. Good grief. These people should be terminated and relegated to fast food employment for the rest.of their lives.
Cameron says: It sucks but this is what our justice system is designed to do. Alec is a scumbag but he still has to right to receive fair treatment in court.
https://x.com/LawSelfDefense/status/1811944852743159843 Here is an alternative take by Andrew Branca. FYI
rbj1 says: Yeah, I’m not sure how it’s material, but I’m not that deep into the case. Baldwin was criminally responsible, but I’ll give the benefit of the doubt that it was important.
However, if the prosecutor and/or the sheriff’s office was that negligent (at least) in this high profile case, what about every other case, especially when the defendant doesn’t have Baldwin level resources? An awful lot of cases need to be looked at.
Anna A says: Yes, and probably a number of the cases the defendant has a Public Defender as a lawyer.
NTSOG says: Thise case has led to considerable discussion on one Australian Shooting site due to the issue of firearm safety. One of the local humourists posted this:
Clint Eastwood made fifteen westerns … never killed a cameraman.
Scott says: Judge did what she had to do, it was a clear violation, even though it’s pretty obvious that Baldwin is guilty.
Here’s the thing, did the Sheriff / prosecutor sandbag their own case on purpose to let him off, knowing if they actually did their jobs he’d be found guilty? As has been proven over the last few years, there truly is no limit to how far the left will go to advance their agenda / protect their own.. Something to think about…
GWB says: The entire debacle surrounding the RUST movie and the tragedy of the shooting has been one that speaks to the utter carelessness of every single person involved.
No, the proper word is NEGLIGENCE. And that holds for the prosecution, too, evidently.
9 Comments